What do you expect this Friday from the Colorado's office?

[HURAKAN]

This Friday, December 7, the first forecast for the 2008 hurricane season will be published by now-more-than-ever controversial scientists from the University of Colorado, Philip J. Klotzbach and William M. Gray. What do you think their numbers will be?

I'm guessing something close to 14/7/3.

[Chacor]

The same hype that they've given us for 2006 and 07 which hasn't really materialised.

[Squarethecircle]

Agreed, but after this, they'll probably play it a little more safe than in the previous two years.

[Cyclone1]

I agree, 15/6/3 is what I think they'll say. Not my prediction, though.

[DanKellFla]

The same hype that they've given us for 2006 and 07 which hasn't really materialised.

Exactly.

Personally, I hope they issue a statment saying that their statments are acedemic exercises and should be viewed with a great deal of doubt and uncertainty.

[Frank2]

Actually, don't be surprised if CSU's Attorneys (and the University President) advise them not to issue a forecast at this time, since they are now in the process of being sued for this very reason...

Unlike NOAA, since CSU is not spending taxpayer's money in order to forecast the weather for the public's safety, but, is just involved in forecasting for private research purposes, it is very possible that they may be told internally to "cease and desist" - at least for the time being...

Perhaps someone here who is an attorney can shed some light on this...

[Squarethecircle]

Oh, no. They'll issue a statement all right. But at the top of the page, they will put a giant statement saying, "DISREGARD WHAT YOU ABOUT TO READ; IT IS COMPLETELY WRONG", or something to that effect.

[Cyclone1]

I hope they do, just to reflect on how rediculous the lawsuits are.

[HURAKAN]

http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Fo ... ov2007.pdf

Almost at the end it says that there will be a forecast coming this Friday.

[RL3AO]

I don't really have proof, but it seems that neutral years have been more active than La Nina years. Just a quick observation.

My guess for CSU will be 15/7/4.

[wxman57]

I don't think that anyone has actually filed a suit against CSU. There was just that article in the paper in the past week about a hotel chain thinking about filing suit. There's no way such a frivolous law suit could be won. At least I'd hope not. Imagine, meteorologists checking with their attorneys before issuing a forecast of a rainy weekend that might hurt tourism.

As for what I think Phil might say, I see nothing to indicate less activity than normal. Most likely no El Nino in 2008 and it may start out with a moderate La Nina. Neutral to La Nina conditions with a warm AMO means a good chance of above-normal activity. But as we saw in 2007, it's not a guarantee of above-normal activity. Though the CSU team's forecast of 14/7/3 was pretty close (last December's early outlook), their forecast of 140% NTC was way off (about 40% off). It's impossible to predict some of the minor seasonal variations that can be the difference between a struggling weak TS (Karen/Ingrid) and a major hurricane. Just a slight change in the upper-air pattern at certain critical times may have resulted in a completely different season. And with the NHC sometimes very generous with their naming, the total number of named storms is not as meaningful.

That said, just for fun, I'd guess that Phil will say just about the same as last December as far as the numbers - 14/7/3 (maybe 14/7/4). 13 or 14 named storms is a good bet. This allows for one or two questionably-named storms.

[cycloneye]

Lets see how the factors align to see how active the 2008 season will be.I think its early to say something definitive as what to expect.I always wait for the April update as I can see how all the different factors are doing to see by then how the season will be in terms of activity.But always the first salvo from a forecaster is always interesting to see.

[wxman57]

Lets see how the factors align to see how active the 2008 season will be.I think its early to say something definitive as what to expect.I always wait for the April update as I can see how all the different factors are doing to see by then how the season will be in terms of activity.But always the first salvo from a forecaster is always interesting to see.

In my presentations, when the subject of seasonal forecasts comes up I always tell them that the numbers predicted are really meaningless. And as for where they're going to hit - "ask me 3 days before landfall and I'll give you a good idea".

[Derek Ortt]

I also see no reason why CSU should not issue a forecast.

Their forecast last December was outstanding. They were only off by 1 hurricane and 1 major hurricane. I really do not understand why some here are so against seasonal forecasts. I get the sense that many here are not using them properly (they should be used as a guide of normal, above, or below normal activity)

[RL3AO]

What I wish they would do is drop this "48% chance of a major hurricane hitting the U.S." crap.

[Squarethecircle]

And the Gulf coast forecasts are really annoying, especially because of how inaccurate they end up being.

[wxman57]

There's no question that the general public don't understand the forecasts. That's why they're of little value to the general public. As for last December's forecast by Klotzbach/Gray, their storm numbers were pretty close (14/7/3) but they also forecast ACE and NTC. Those forecasts were quite far off the mark.

I also see no reason why CSU should not issue a forecast.

Their forecast last December was outstanding. They were only off by 1 hurricane and 1 major hurricane. I really do not understand why some here are so against seasonal forecasts. I get the sense that many here are not using them properly (they should be used as a guide of normal, above, or below normal activity)

[Cyclone1]

I don't really have proof, but it seems that neutral years have been more active than La Nina years. Just a quick observation.

My guess for CSU will be 15/7/4.

Yeah, 2005 was a neutral.

[CrazyC83]

I wonder if there is any chance of going low leaving the door open for El Nino?

[Ptarmigan]

I don't really have proof, but it seems that neutral years have been more active than La Nina years. Just a quick observation.

My guess for CSU will be 15/7/4.

Some of the most active seasons happened in Neutral years, 1933, 1995, and 2005 come to mind.